Just a reminder, junk science and New Age hokum does nothing to explain or help after the quake

[Godhumor]

After a horrifying natural disaster like this, one in which I have family caught up in, trying to introduce hypotheses that blame human action (or bizarre other worldly explanations) does nothing to help and reduces the situation to a farce.

With that in mind, humans simply don't have the ability or the technology to cause this kind of seismic shift. So, no:

- human greed leading to profiteers doing something awful that caused the disaster

- deep drilling that ruptured a fissure or somehow moved the plates


Tectonic movement is actually extremely well understood, as are the reasons for earthquake. Now, we can't predict when earthquakes are going to occur, but that is no reason to hypothesize that:

- The moon's gravitational pull somehow caused this

- Solar flares somehow caused this

- The earth is purging itself of humans

- That it is some sort of "warning"


Seriously, this isn't about telling people about what they can and can't believe--it is about the fact that this process is understood, and that introducing crap into the discussion reduces the impact of what actually happened.

[stuntcat]

1. reckety

reckety rec

[ReggieVeggie]

2. that's not entirely true

If we placed a nuclear bomb here or there we could make earthquakes happen. Now, there's an absolutely minimal possibility that would happen, but THAT could cause an earthquake. Draining a pocket of oil from some subsurface layer will not.

[Posteritatis]

5. We really couldn't

Humans cannot shift tectonic plates. It really is just that simple. The most powerful nuclear weapons ever designed aren't a fraction of what it'd take to do that.

[FogerRox]

138. Plates are already stressed. they just need lubrication.

Try Google Scholar.

Heres a diary at Kos with plenty of good links:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/01/951529/-Arkansas-quakes,-Fracking-and-injection-induced-quakes?showAll=yes

[pintobean]

6. Link?

Or is this faith?

[Orrex]

11. Luthor, you poisonous snake!

[Godhumor]

16. you might make a localized area rumble, but you would not cause an earthquake

The power required to move a plate is well beyond nuclear bombs.

[ReggieVeggie]

58. if you placed the largest nuke at a stress point...

say an unstable area overdue for a release of tension, that the nuke blast couldn't trigger it?

[Godhumor]

65. Not even close to enough energy to cause it

By a very large magnitude.

[FogerRox]

139. Read and learn

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/03/01/951529/-Arkansas-quakes,-Fracking-and-injection-induced-quakes?showAll=yes

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. No, the energy released the other day

is larger than the whole combined nuke arsenal of the US and Russia combined.

[hobbit709]

31. Biggest nuke ever set off was about 50 megatons.

Mount St. Helens-a wet baby firecracker as far as volcanic eruptions go-was the equivalent to a 250 megaton blast.

No nuke ever set off a tectonic plate movement.

[ReggieVeggie]

56. not saying it did or ever that such a thing was attempted

[FogerRox]

137. Actually oil pumping is know to cause small quakes as far back as the 1930's

And injection of fracking fluid is connected with quakes in the 2 to 5 range. Colorado, Dallas Fort Worth and Arkansas.

[tabatha]

3. I heard old age religionists come up with some of that crap.

God's punishment, warning, etc.

Here is an example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x624134

[Godhumor]

20. Yup, included "warning" in the OP. Should have mentioned it wasn't just New Age doing it

Apologies.

[JVS]

4. Says you! If we all knew the secret ways of the crystal skulls this shit wouldn't be happening.

[pintobean]

10. I don't think I have a crystallized skull

At least, not when it was last x-rayed.
:evilgrin:

[JVS]

30. Then you're part of the problem.

Maybe you can be helped by getting some of that crystal head vodka that dan ackroyd sells.

[pintobean]

34. Thanks for the tip

I'd never heard of it. This should make my wife happy - she's always telling me that I'm part of the problem.

[lunatica]

7. Take a breath

Lashing out at what other people believe isn't going to help anything. Everyone is in shock over this. People are just trying to make sense of what happened.

I hope your people are safe. I live in the Bay Area and we've experienced some harsh earthquakes. We know how bad they are even when they're not as bad as the one that just happened in Japan. We know we live on the San Andreas Fault.

[RandomKoolzip]

12. Making sense of what happened by embracing nonsense or junk science doesn't do anyone

any good. In an emergency, the LAST thing people ought to do is turn to woo or unprovable beliefs. Rational thinking in such a context is what's needed.

What I was seeing here on DU yesterday appalled me. Blaming an earthquake on humans acting badly was just...I mean, really? In the 21st century we're still clinging to that shit? It's the left/woo equivalent of Pat Robertson blaming hurricanes on gay people.

[Godhumor]

13. This isn't lashing out--we understand what happened.

Just very frustrating to see loss of life being blamed on things well outside the knowledge of natural law, and then the pile ons where people make jokes about believing it. Just cheapens what happened.

[femrap]

17. I was in San Fran for the

Loma Prieta (World Series) quake which was 'only' a 7.2. I can't imagine an 8.9.

I pray the reactors' containment casings hold.

But as many Native Americans believe and so do I....Mother Nature is pissed off and rightly so. Nothing has more power than her even though man wants to think it does.

:hi:

[MattBaggins]

39. That's part of the problem

There is no such thing as mother nature

A tectonic plate shifted nothing more

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cleanhippie]

76. "People are just trying to make sense of what happened" - The op SPECIFICALLY addresses this

that "People are just trying to make sense of what happened" by invoking supernatural causes, junk science, etc is NOT helping at all.


Way to miss the point.

[SoCalDem]

109. No need to "make sense" of a natural, uncontrolable planetary process

Earth is constantly "evolving", and will continue to do so until it blows up or gets hit by some cosmic junk or until the sun dies..

Cracking a book ... a text book , and understanding how "seismic stuff" works is the solution, but most people get their "education" from the likes of Dr Sanjay Gupta , Wolf Blitzer , or whichever anchor is schedules for the hour..

[Pacifist Patriot]

8. Could not agree more.

[Ozymanithrax]

9. Many people hate the fact that Shit Happens and there is no reason...

other than just random chance.

People want to think that there is meaning in the universe, meaning behind the workings of the universe, and randomness violates their want. That is why people slip so quickly into saying God is punishing the X, y, an z. That is why they want to blame evil corporate zombies.

It is good to hear a call for reason. I hope everyone answers.

[RandomKoolzip]

14. Actually, coroporate zombie ARE to blame for a lot of things....

But earthquakes are not on that list.

[Ozymanithrax]

23. Those are man made disasters, which earthqukes are not. n/t

[RandomKoolzip]

27. Precisely my point!

[Boswell]

15. YAWN, another public scold telling everyone else

that his OPINION should rule everyone else.

[Godhumor]

18. Science is not opinion. What causes earthquakes is certainly not an opinion

Pretending anything else minimizes the loss of life and severe damage caused by this.

[pintobean]

24. It's my opinion that the science is sound.

But, my opinion is irrelevant. I'm not a scientist.
Good OP -I recced it.

[Boswell]

85. so you can predict them?

have you told anyone else about this super-power of yours? after all if you know the cause of each and every earthquake then there is no longer any need for geology research and classes and NOAA. is that you Glennda?

[nadinbrzezinski]

86. What do you think is the holy grail of Geology?

that said, yes, we know HOW earthquakes happen... and why... and they were able to... FOR THE FIRST TIME, give a warning of upwards of two minutes that it was coming. That warning SAVED LIVES.

You also understand why that is so huge right?

Oh and science is NOT opinion, blaming a bronze age theology is.

[Boswell]

94. magnetic effects are "bronze age theology"

man you are wedded to your own superstition aren't you? you really seem to believe that what is known about today is all that will ever be known.

[nadinbrzezinski]

107. Magnetic effects... oh boy

whatever dude.

And no, we don't know all there is known, but we have a pretty good understanding of HOW plate tectonics work.

have a good life by the way.

[Godhumor]

92. What is your point?

We can't predict them far enough in advance to get people out of the way--as the other person replying to you stated, we get about a 2 minute window, if the quake happens near where we happen to have monitoring equipment.

And if I need to explain the difference between a tectonic earthquake and making the earth rumble, then I don't know what else to tell you.

[Boswell]

99. the same question applies to you

but you can't seem to grasp that today is not the end of scientific inquiry and that outside factors (such as a hugh magnetic charge pulsing through the crust) might have some influence on the timing and severity of earthquakes (yeseven tectonic ones) might someday be found to at least have an effect. will you then apologize for your abuse? doubtful...I on the other hand am simply keeping that kind of option open meanwhile you indulge in insults and defending your faith.

[NYC Liberal]

29. It's not opinion. It's fact. And you do not have the right

to your own facts.

[Boswell]

78. which "fact" would that be?

as it is you include magnetic effects among your "impossibilities" and that has not been ruled out by any "fact", and your painfully silly attempt to pretend that our little planet is somehow isolated and thus immune to any effects from outside sources is just wrong. so, your post is simply you scolding others for not holding the same partially (recalled from HS classes probably) science grounded with a mixture of comic book mythology belief as you do.

[NYC Liberal]

106. These FACTS:

With that in mind, humans simply don't have the ability or the technology to cause this kind of seismic shift. So, no:

- human greed leading to profiteers doing something awful that caused the disaster

- deep drilling that ruptured a fissure or somehow moved the plates


Tectonic movement is actually extremely well understood, as are the reasons for earthquake. Now, we can't predict when earthquakes are going to occur, but that is no reason to hypothesize that:

- The moon's gravitational pull somehow caused this

- Solar flares somehow caused this

- The earth is purging itself of humans

- That it is some sort of "warning"

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[14thColony]

51. And here's an example of the problem right here

People who think that facts are equivalent to opinions.

[Boswell]

80. interesting, care to be specific?

you attack and insult yet do not bother to say why.

[14thColony]

102. You think THAT was an attack? Oh my.

Stating that someone who conflates fact with opinion is part of the problem is an "attack and insult"? I fear you might be a bit too gentle of disposition to survive long around here if this is what you view as an attack.

Yes, I'll be specific, since you've asked:
- People who say they don't "believe" in evolution, as if it's just another belief system short on facts and long on faith, instead of a rigourously proven theory that has risen to the status of natural law, with more evidence to back it up than GRAVITY has; yet those same people would never say they don't believe in gravity; but they have the right to their opinion on evolution!

- People who opine that the earth is only 6,000 years old despite the unrelenting firehose of evidence that proves otherwise; but hey, it's their opinion!

- People who make the statements as contended by the OP re: natural disasters; I think we're pretty damned sure in the 21st century they're not caused by demons, angry gods, imbalances in galactic chi, or a misalignment of mystic crystals; they're caused by pretty well-understood (if not predictable) natural phenomena; but if someone wants to fly in the face of actual hard, falsifieable, testable evidence, well they're entitled to their opinion!

- Homeopathy: I think you can imagine what I'll say here so I won't bother.

- Etc., etc.

In the past people having some silly opinions about reality (as if reality gives a shit what their opinin is) wasn't a big deal. But nowawadys in some countries (the US first and foremost) real live science is in retreat in the education system, because someone or some group thinks their frigging opinions about reality carry as much or more weight than cold hard science. It is causing us to collectively become dumber, and dumber means less able to compete/survive, and therefore less viable as societies for those societies who think they have the luxury of indulging baseless opinion and elevating it to the stature of facts.

So you wanted me to say why, and now I have.

[BobbyBoring]

124. +1

Fucking A, B, and C!

[cleanhippie]

81. Wrong.

Your belief (if thats what you have) in supernatural causes is an OPINION. Plate tectonics is NOT opinion, its fact, backed by multiple lines of converging evidence to support it.


Education, its whats for dinner. Have some.

[Boswell]

100. magnitism is supernatural to you?

are you sure you want to state that so plainly?

[Posteritatis]

125. Magnetism causing megathrust earthquakes certainly is. (nt)

[cleanhippie]

132. If thats what you think I said, you really have gone off the deep end.

[Celebration]

19. Umm

"Tectonic movement is actually extremely well understood .......................now, we can't predict when earthquakes are going to occur ."

Oxymoron?

[Godhumor]

25. Absolutely not, you can understand what causes something--doesn't mean you have the ability to

predict the future. The science behind earthquakes is actually one of the things we have the most insight into from a physical sciences point of view. It does not allow us to predict when two plates are going to catch and build up energy due to a number of factors.

The same is true for a huge amount of the sciences. Understanding does not always lead to prevention or prediction.

[Celebration]

41. I don't really buy this

The conditions that make various areas earthquake prone are well known. Plate tectonics is well known. But, what sets them off? Do you believe that they just happen randomly, at any time, for no cause at all that triggers them? Is that really what you are saying? The timing of an event has a precipitating cause. I am not knowledgeable enough to know what sets off an earthquake. But the reason I don't is because I have incomplete information, and NOT because they just happen randomly out of the blue. Of course the propensity to have an earthquake is known, but the trigger is unknown. You are saying there is no trigger. I am saying the trigger is unknown.

However, some triggers may be known. In Arkansas there have been a series of small earthquakes, and now many scientists feel that it has to do with fracking for natural gas. But, even that may be controversial. You know why? Because, in fact, the causes of earthquakes are not all settled scientifically, as you seem to indicate. There is a lot to learn.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/03/arkansas-fracking-sites-l_n_830720.html

[Godhumor]

59. Actually, major earthquake causes are well known--we can't predict when they happen

In real simplified layman's terms, the most common are caused when plates rub, get stuck, and then "pop" off each other (Before anyone else jumps in, this is not the only way plates interact with each other, I know.). We even understand how plates move, too.

We just don't have the necessary ability to identify where or when plates stick, for a huge number of reasons--not least of which is how slow they actually move.

We really do understand earthquakes. And I am speaking as someone who has both taught physical geography and designed curriculum for a physical geography course.

[Celebration]

72. You really didn't address the fracking in Arkansas

The fact that they are stopping it shows me that there is some scientific merit to the notion that it could be a trigger in earthquakes. But I have a feeling it has not yet made the textbooks.

[Godhumor]

73. Can't address fracking until after the commission returns its findings

But fracking is not a cause for tectonic earthquakes, I can say that with certainty. If they find that they produce localized tremors off faults, that is a completely different, although equally horrifying, situation. It will be interesting to see what the scientists return.

[nadinbrzezinski]

116. I will.. in layman terms

the fracking in Kansas is NOT happening on the edges where two plates meet. It is happening in the middle of the North American plate.. the mechanisms for what would cause the quakes in the middle of a stable plate in very old rock are DIFFERENT than the edges where two plates meet.

A cursory look at a fault map would help by the way.

As Godhumor said, that they still the reports back... but the MECHANISMS are NOT those of plate tectonics.

[NeedleCast]

32. Not an oxymoron at all

We understand the weather conditions that make tornadoes possible, but they are still very unpredictable.

[Celebration]

42. see my reply above

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=624088&mesg_id=624518

[speltwon]

120. Nobody has mentioned chaos or complexity theories yet

and thqat explains part of why we understand how it works, but we don't have omniscient knowledge with complete exactitude of every single relevant factor. given that complete knowledge of every exact angle, weight. force, etc. effecting X and incredible computing power to continue to compute all that stuff, etc.

It's that whole butterfly flapping it's wing thing.

[cleanhippie]

84. umm, no.

You should not opine on things you dont understand.

[MineralMan]

101. Nope. We can predict that an earthquake will occur in some place,

but not when it will occur. We know why earthquakes occur. We can identify earthquake faults in an area. We can predict that an earthquake WILL occur in that area, but not when. We don't have enough information for that prediction, and we're not likely to get that information in the future. But, I can predict absolutely that an earthquake will occur on the San Andreas Fault this year. I cannot tell you how large it will be or where on the fault it will occur, but I can predict with zero error that one will occur within the year. I could even shorten that time frame, if you'd like and still get it right. But, I cannot tell you either exactly when or exactly where on the fault it will occur.

[Celebration]

110. If we don't have enough information for a prediction of when

then, IMHO, by definition, earthquakes are not very well understood. It makes sense that there is a cause for an earthquake being triggered. Otherwise the timing would be random. That doesn't seem logical to me. The timing of the quake must have a cause. But in any case "don't have enough information" does not equate to "very well understood."

[MineralMan]

114. What makes you think the timing is not random?

It is, more or less, but the causes are known. Random merely means unpredictable with precision, in this case. We can predict earthquakes, but not the exact time they will occur. In Japan, one can predict with certainty that there will be many earthquakes.

Yes, there is a cause for earthquakes. It is tectonic movement of the plates. That is well-understood.

Here's another prediction: I will die. You will die. We know what things cause death among humans. We cannot, however, predict when a person will die. And yet, we understand why every person will die very well. Same principle.

[Celebration]

131. there is incomplete knowledge

about when we will die. Do you think when we die is random? No, it has to do with the state of our health. Even though we may not know when we may have a fatal stroke, a stroke and its timing all have definite causes. At the present time we don't have enough information to predict the timing of a stroke or a heart attack, or cancer, but they definitely have causes. I would say that strokes or heart attacks or cancer are not well understood. If they were well understood, we could predict them more precisely.

[meow mix]

21. and they have a whole army here helping to promote lies.

sick people

[Desertrose]

43. ???

...sick people promoting lies....here...on DU?

Surely you jest.


But I guess it depends which lies you are talking about.

[SheilaT]

22. The problem is that most people have a very low understanding

of the actual forces of nature. The history of our coming to learn that plate tectonics accurately describes how our planet shapes and reforms itself was slow in coming. It took the Chile earthquake of 1960 and the Good Friday quake in Alaska in 1964 to essentially confirm the theory of plate tectonics.

On an alternate note, a while after the 2004 tsunami, some man who'd lived and worked on some small island somewhere in the Indian Ocean was quite concerned about the inhabitants there, because most of the island was quite low-lying. When he was able to get there some weeks later he discovered to his amazement that every single person there had survived. Why? Their creation myth was that the world rested on top of a giant tree, and every so often someone (maybe a god, maybe some creature that lived in the tree, I no longer recall the precise details) would get angry and shake the tree, and when that happened, it was best to retreat to high ground. When they felt the earthquake tremor, they all went to high ground, and when the tsunami arrived they were all well above it.

I remain in awe of a creation myth that can just happen to make a people do exactly what is right in dangerous circumstances.

I have nothing but contempt for a belief system that says some natural disaster is God punishing those people. I am bemused by beliefs that Gaia is shaking us off, or something like that. I do admire a belief system that says we are here to help out each other, and so pushes people to reach out to others in bad times like this. Which is what every belief system should do. Many actually say stuff like that, but too many adherents are happier to condemn and judge others.

[MorningGlow]

35. Well said

Wish I could rec your post. :applause:

[antigone382]

38. That Island's belief system makes sense, actually.

From an anthropological perspective, most spiritual beliefs and moral systems are adaptive--they grow out of the environment in which humans find themselves, and legitimize the choices that enhance survival of the individual and the group in that setting. A creation myth that incorporates a practical survival tactic for a type of natural disaster that is likely to occur in a given area is pretty standard. You can interpet the designation of certain foods as clean or unclean in the Old Testament as another adaptive religious practice, causing people to avoid the foods that would most likely contain deadly pathogens in that time period.

[Raksha]

50. Very well said. To see patterns in events (synchronicity)

and find meaning in those patterns does NOT necessarily mean one is postulating a cause-and-effect relationship.

[Zorra]

26. Nature is powerful and unpredictable. Always been this way. nt

[RevStPatrick]

28. You mean we're not really fleas?

And Mother Nature isn't just trying to scratch us off her body?

Yeah, there's been a lot silly shit around here and elsewhere lately. But that's nothing new. It's part of the human condition. We are a species that makes shit up, no matter what happens.

[Maru Kitteh]

33. + one thousand brazillion - and thanks for posting this.

[FLPanhandle]

37. It is sort of depressing to see how many people even here fail at logic & science

I consider most of the people here pretty intelligent, but somewhere their science education was a failure.

[GoCubsGo]

45. Even more depressing--FoxPropaganda has picked up on it.

Some twit on the European Economic and Social Committee Twittered that it was related to "global warming", and the right wing propagandists are running with it:

http://nation.foxnews.com/climate-change/2011/03/11/it-begins-left-blames-earthquake-tsunami-global-warming

Search "earthquake global warming" for more examples. The top five or six results are for nutter sites.

[14thColony]

55. You might want to read the article in post #48

Chances are the twit has.

[Godhumor]

71. No effect on quakes in the populated world other than those close to the Arctic and Antarctic

And even those it is tremors and not major quakes.

Nothing to do, at all, with the other day.

[GoCubsGo]

97. Thank you.

[drokhole]

105. Don't be so quick on that "thank you"...

From that very same Fox message board, from the user quicken66:

"I have never understood why so many people see this as a political issue. It is not. If you have not read any of the science, you really shouldn't be raging about this. But the science for particular phenomena is actually fairly simple.

Let me start by saying -- there is no way to know at this point if the Japan earthquake, which took place in the ocean, is a consequence of what I am describing. A year or so from now, it will probably be possible to know

However, an increase of high level earthquakes and tsunamis have been predicted as a consequence of climate change for more than a decade. There was in fact an entire international science seminar on this one issue in 2009.

Before I explain why, I think folks need to understand the controversy: There is no scientist anywhere that disputes that global temperatures are rising. That is simply a measurement. The dispute is about the cause -- is it from the burning of fossil fuels, or sun storms or a natural climate transition. There is a lot of science pointing toward the burning of fossil fuels, but, as I said, there are scientists who disagree.

So why would climate change cause earthquakes, and why has this been predicted for more than a decade? Warmer temperatures has cause significant glacial movement -- again, this is a fact, it is measurable. Glacial movement, even by a few feet (and glaciers have moved much more than that) causes an increased pressure to build up to the connected earth crust. This then translates into a higher level of pressure on tectonic plates. That pressure is then released in earthquakes.

As might be obvious, the majority of those earthquakes would take place in the ocean. And that is what we have seen in the past decade -- an enormous increase of oceanic plate pressure release, which means earthquakes. (So that you know, for this same reason there is a prediction of increased volcanic activity, but I don't know the numbers of that.) The reason that scientists are examining whether this might be related to climate change

This is not a bunch of liberals who argue this -- although they might. This is NASA (where I work) and experts in this field from all over the world. You are free to disagree (or agree), but please don't do so just on the basis of political belief. Politics has nothing to do with this. If you want to disagree, review the science first -- although you'll find that even those who disagree about the cause of climate change don't disagree that it causes oceanic earthquakes.

By the way...I voted for McCain. I am not a single issue voter. I also believe that, if carbon emissions are the cause of climate change, it is too late to fix the problem, so cutting back on the burning of fossil fuels won't accomplish anything anymore."


Also, in case you didn't take 14th Colony's advice, here's a link to my post:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=624088&mesg_id=624638

And: http://www.livescience.com/7366-global-warming-spur-earthquakes-volcanoes.html

[NYC Liberal]

46. If you want to be terrified, peruse these two threads:

NASA to bomb the Moon http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6712126 (750+ replies)

Is the Moon really sacred to some religions? http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6723794 (200+ replies)

Some of the replies really are scary.

[SidDithers]

54. Ah yes, the moon bombing threads...

good times :thumbsup:

Sid

[Rex]

74. NASA had a very good reason to bomb the Moon.

It is made of cheese and we earthlings DEMAND moon cheese! NOW!

[Godhumor]

98. I thought it was to knock those arrogant whalers down a notch or two?

Greatest episode of Futurama, ever.

[Rex]

111. You know, I have yet to see any of the new Futuramas!

Almost worth it to get cable again! :(

[Godhumor]

119. *cough* Netflix watch instantly *cough* n/t

[Rex]

136. MMM..netflix I always forget about them. Thanks.

[FLPanhandle]

118. Ahhh, I missed those.

Hilarious yet sad that so many people have been so let down by our education system.

[BobbyBoring]

126. It's by design

and it's working

[speltwon]

121. Einstein had an excuse

when quantum theory was still in its infancy "God doesn't place dice with the universe". Now, there is no excuse for not understanding at least a bit of quantum theory, as well as complexity and chaos.

Or at least one SHOULD understand them before people comment on complex phenomena like earthquakes, etc. when they are looking for reasons why predictability is lacking.

Weather is the same thing.

[hedgetrimmer]

40. Yeah, prove it...

What do any of us actually know? How many levels of reality is there? What has "actually" happened? How can you prove you know what you know? How can you prove there is reality? How can you prove that anything has actually happened? How can you prove that I or you exist? How can we prove anything?

How can we understand? What can we understand? What is understanding? etc....

[GoneOffShore]

90. Put down the pomo and step away from the keyboard.

No one will get hurt.

[Codeine]

104. This is why one semester of Philosophy is a dangerous thing. nt

[speltwon]

122. The term sophomore comes to mind

From the greek for "wise idiot" or "knowing idiot"

People who understand just enough to THINK they really understand a whole lot more. And darnit, they are willing to let you know, too

[FLPanhandle]

128. LOL.

I had to laugh out loud

[cleanhippie]

133. Think you have seen the Matrix too many times.

[Rex]

44. Like anyone needed a reminder. Sometimes I think people post things

just to start fights. :eyes:

[femrap]

67. or distraction

from the War on the Middle Class and Unions.

I'm sorry I responded to the OP and will place him on Ignore.

[originalpckelly]

47. Actually, gravity can and does have an effect on volcanic activity...

but that's on one of Jupiter's moons, not on Earth.

However, there may be some kind of contributing factor.

Never say never. Everything else though is quite silly.

[Godhumor]

63. Moon is farther away than normal from the Earth. The Super moon theory is just silly

Bad Astronomy has a good write up on it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

87. Compare the mass of io vs Jupiter

and then earth and our moon,

no moon has no effect beyond water sloshing on our oceans, we call them tides.

[drokhole]

48. Just a reminder, rapidly melting ice due to climate change can lead to earthquakes...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/03/080314-warming-quakes.html


Melting Ice Sheets Can Cause Earthquakes, Study Finds
Mason Inman
for National Geographic News
March 14, 2008

As ice sheets melt, they can release pent-up energy and trigger massive earthquakes, according to new study.

"Global warming may already be triggering such earthquakes and may cause more in the future as ice continues to melt worldwide, the researchers say.

A series of large earthquakes shook Scandinavia around 10,000 years ago, along faults that are now quiet, the scientists point out.

The timing of each earthquake roughly coincided with the melting of thick ice sheets from the last ice age in those same places.

Researchers had suspected that the melting had triggered these earthquakes by releasing pressure that had built up in Earth's crust.

Now a new study, the first to use sophisticated computer models to simulate how ice sheets would affect the crust in the region, bolsters this scenario.

The study showed that earthquakes are "suppressed in presence of the ice and promoted during melting of the ice," said study leader Andrea Hampel of the Ruhr University Bochum in Germany.

Hampel and a colleague had earlier found evidence that the shrinkage of a huge lake at the end of the last ice age had triggered a series of large earthquakes in Utah.

The new study shows this can happen even along faults that are normally quiet and are not prone to slip.

The new research will be published soon in the journal Earth and Planetary Science Letters."



Now, not saying that's what caused the earthquake in Japan, but claiming global warming can cause (or amplify the severity of) earthquakes is certainly not "junk science." And, since it would seem "human greed leading to profiteers doing something awful that caused the disaster" has certainly lead to the increase of global warming, I'm not so sure you can entirely dismiss that point. In your effort to come off as some kind of "voice of reason," you sound just as obnoxiously dogmatic as someone who solely claims "the earth is purging itself of humans." In truth, it's probably a combination of a shit-ton of things (no matter how small the influence...even if it's just raising magnitude up .5 points on the Richter scale), with plate tectonics being the obvious function by which it occurs.

Also:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/08/climatechange
http://planetsave.com/2011/03/08/arkansas-earthquakes-linked-to-fracking-two-gas-disposal-sites-suspended/ (this instance may not be the problem in Japan, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have an effect on other quakes)

[tabatha]

49. Man exacerbates global warming; which can lead to earthquakes.

[Godhumor]

53. Nope. n/t

[Godhumor]

52. 10,000 years ago was an ice age with significant glacial movements

This has zero effect on any modern earthquake, with the possible exception of those occurring in the Arctic or Antarctic.

[14thColony]

75. Look, I'm on your side here

But careful how far you go dismissing anything that seems at first glance to have no obvious causal relationship. Just like tectonic plate theory, isostatic rebound is pretty well-understood now as well, so to say that the end of the last ice age 10,000 yrs ago (actually closer to 11,500 yrs ago) has "zero effect on any modern earthquake" is going waaaaaaaaaaaaay out on very an unsupported limb. In the areas where isostatic rebound is taking place, there is substantial evidence that it's a contributing factor in some earthquakes, and these regions can be found well outside the arctic/antarctic circles.

[Godhumor]

96. It's not about sides...isostatic rebound has been theorized to help with smaller indirect and

localized quakes. The researchers also admit that major tectonic quakes are a completely different story.

Admittedly, I should have phrased it better, but I got on a roll. My bad.

[14thColony]

103. It happens to me too. No harm, no foul. nt

[drokhole]

112. Another great article in line with what you're saying...

...that also goes a bit further (in taking into account the rise in oceanic water pressure and temperature):

http://www.livescience.com/7366-global-warming-spur-earthquakes-volcanoes.html

[Raksha]

66. Thank you!!!

Re "In your effort to come off as some kind of "voice of reason," you sound just as obnoxiously dogmatic as someone who solely claims "the earth is purging itself of humans." In truth, it's probably a combination of a shit-ton of things (no matter how small the influence...even if it's just raising magnitude up .5 points on the Richter scale), with plate tectonics being the obvious function by which it occurs."

[Godhumor]

69. But it is not true

The mechanics of quakes are well understood--really well understood. Man-made global warming, hell any human action, does not come remotely close to being able to trigger one. The only affect humans have on these kind of quakes is the loss of life and the rebuild.

[Jamastiene]

57. STFU type posts never do very well on DU.

If people believe some of the stuff you do not believe, so be it. It's a discussion board. STFU type posts do nothing but piss people off, whether they agree with the other parts of your posts or not.

[Godhumor]

61. Science is not belief

Which is the main problem. And I wasn't telling people to STFU--I was asking for respect by not trivializing the tragedy by looking for causes where none exist.

[Jamastiene]

140. In that case, you are really comparing apples to oranges.

Ya know? Science is one thing. Belief is another. I agree that is true. But, why compare the two in the first place?

[uppityperson]

62. Very much so. Thank you, I posted similar yesterday.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=619531&mesg_id=619531

[Iggo]

64. According to our accounts payable person at work, it's the end times.

:eyes:

[cecilfirefox]

68. Rec, rec, rec. Tired of the stupid. Its just nature. nt

[Mybrokenchains]

70. internet lesson #1137

do not post anything on or about new age hokum, or the new age hokums will hokum your hokum.
that is all.

[dickthegrouch]

77. Does any one else see a correlation here?

I used the USGS data from 1900 to 2010 to create this graph.
There is something that needs to be explained !

Edited to display graph correctly(Thanks P)

[Godhumor]

93. Sure, equipment has gotten much, much better

More monitoring stations, more sensitive equipment.

[14thColony]

108. My first thought exactly

Increase in frequency of event X, or increase in ability to DETECT event X?

[FLPanhandle]

129. I see a correlation between technology/event monitoring and events being recorded

What correlation do you see?

[Dappleganger]

79. Winter is coming...

[Rex]

82. ZOMG!

Kittah willz controlz uze!!!

BRING ME MAH MILK, EARTH SLAVE!!!

[WinkyDink]

88. Just a reminder: ".....than are dreamt of in your philosophy, Horatio."

[Fire Walk With Me]

89. "Now, we can't predict when earthquakes are going to occur..."

O Rly?

[Godhumor]

91. Rly.

y?

[cleanhippie]

134. Yeah, Rly.

Do think it IS possible to predict when and where an earthquake will occur?

[MineralMan]

95. But what's the fun of just sticking to the facts?

It's more fun to speculate wildly and introduce all sorts of conspiracy theories about things. I mean, what the heck? :sarcasm:

[Rex]

113. You, like others expect too much from the population at DU.

Should have been around for the 9/11 debates...some of the stuff was creative genius!!!

[MineralMan]

115. Not really, no, I don't. More's the pity.

[drokhole]

117. Facts are pesky things...

...especially when they prove your equally dogmatic view point wrong:

http://www.livescience.com/7366-global-warming-spur-earthquakes-volcanoes.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/08/climatechange
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7604188/Volcanic-ash-cloud-Global-warming-may-trigger-more-volcanoes.html


And this, from a commenter on Fox Nation, no less:

"I have never understood why so many people see this as a political issue. It is not. If you have not read any of the science, you really shouldn't be raging about this. But the science for particular phenomena is actually fairly simple.

Let me start by saying -- there is no way to know at this point if the Japan earthquake, which took place in the ocean, is a consequence of what I am describing. A year or so from now, it will probably be possible to know

However, an increase of high level earthquakes and tsunamis have been predicted as a consequence of climate change for more than a decade. There was in fact an entire international science seminar on this one issue in 2009.

Before I explain why, I think folks need to understand the controversy: There is no scientist anywhere that disputes that global temperatures are rising. That is simply a measurement. The dispute is about the cause -- is it from the burning of fossil fuels, or sun storms or a natural climate transition. There is a lot of science pointing toward the burning of fossil fuels, but, as I said, there are scientists who disagree.

So why would climate change cause earthquakes, and why has this been predicted for more than a decade? Warmer temperatures has cause significant glacial movement -- again, this is a fact, it is measurable. Glacial movement, even by a few feet (and glaciers have moved much more than that) causes an increased pressure to build up to the connected earth crust. This then translates into a higher level of pressure on tectonic plates. That pressure is then released in earthquakes.

As might be obvious, the majority of those earthquakes would take place in the ocean. And that is what we have seen in the past decade -- an enormous increase of oceanic plate pressure release, which means earthquakes. (So that you know, for this same reason there is a prediction of increased volcanic activity, but I don't know the numbers of that.) The reason that scientists are examining whether this might be related to climate change

This is not a bunch of liberals who argue this -- although they might. This is NASA (where I work) and experts in this field from all over the world. You are free to disagree (or agree), but please don't do so just on the basis of political belief. Politics has nothing to do with this. If you want to disagree, review the science first -- although you'll find that even those who disagree about the cause of climate change don't disagree that it causes oceanic earthquakes.

By the way...I voted for McCain. I am not a single issue voter. I also believe that, if carbon emissions are the cause of climate change, it is too late to fix the problem, so cutting back on the burning of fossil fuels won't accomplish anything anymore."



And this, from me, somewhere in the middle of this topic:

"Now, not saying that's what caused the earthquake in Japan, but claiming global warming can cause (or amplify the severity of) earthquakes is certainly not "junk science." And, since it would seem "human greed leading to profiteers doing something awful that caused the disaster" has certainly lead to the increase of global warming, I'm not so sure you can entirely dismiss that point. In your effort to come off as some kind of "voice of reason," you sound just as obnoxiously dogmatic as someone who solely claims "the earth is purging itself of humans." In truth, it's probably a combination of a shit-ton of things (no matter how small the influence...even if it's just raising magnitude up .5 points on the Richter scale), with plate tectonics being the obvious function by which it occurs."

[Name removed]

123. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[drokhole]

130. He also conveniently glosses over certain scientific evidence...

...that punches holes in his dogmatic claims:

http://www.livescience.com/7366-global-warming-spur-earthquakes-volcanoes.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/sep/08/climatechange
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7604188/Volcanic-ash-cloud-Global-warming-may-trigger-more-volcanoes.html

[Godhumor]

141. good, someone bumped the thread....let me respond to this

Rebound theory is thought to create localized tremors and has zero effect on tectonic or "true" earthquakes. The researchers themselves say this--the dramatic language in the Guardian and Telegraph not withstanding. Now, they also theorize that the tremors might have been true quakes from when a huge portion of ice disappeared 10,000 years ago across multiple plates--but, again this is a hypothesis, and not one that has ever been tested--nor does it have any bearing on modern tectonic quakes .

Now, in interest of intellectual honestly, you can view my OP with the following disclaimer:

Earthquakes that are caused by tectonic shifting, such as the one that occurred in Japan, are extremely well understood. Localized tremors that are not plate driven can be caused by anything as simple as a hand grenade (Which registers a 0.5 on the Richter Scale) and mass foot stomping in a stadium, to more advanced theories involving ice receding. The vast majority of these tremors are unfelt by humans, minimal in time span and entirely unrelated to the tectonic earthquakes that most people think about when they think about the word earthquake.

[Duer 157099]

127. ...said the Church to Galileo

Just remember that scientific knowledge is constantly evolving. Constantly.

[RainDog]

135. k&r n/t